LE

When routine bites hard, And ambitions are low, And resentment rides high, But emotions won't grow...By voting on this post with a SABC I confirm that I am a more than a bit stupid and an all round loser.

LE

The experts you cite were making predictions. The CAA, RAeS, FAA etc are making statements of legal fact. There is a slight difference,

The only variable is how long it will take to set up the local CAA infrastructure and people to the required legal standards. From their working experience. And they are the only people who have this are that it would take a minimum of 5 years.... being a Chartered Engineer myself I know there are things like requirements to have a minimum of X years appropreate fully mentored and signed off experience of X, y and Z to to the appropriate standards etc.

Now you could change that from X years to say half that. However the Rest of the World (not the EU) will not accept that. the US FAA certainly won't The International Civil Aviation Rules are not negotiable in that way.

So you have e legal, safety and engineering rules, none of this is political or negotiable. Also the bits that are negotiable we don't have a leg to stand on. It is not a case of the UK can do what it likes... that went with the British Empire. For International Aviation if we step out of EASA according to a senior CAA person I spoke to "the UK has as much clout as Uganda" I have no idea why Uganda but there it is.

Somethings can't be fudged. That is why everyone who knows anything about Civil Aviation (particularly all the UK based airlines) there is no plan B other than staying in EASA which required membership pf the ECJ.

The UK has no leverage in any of this.

So what do you suggest that the people who know what they are talking about haven't thought of. You can cite the relevant legal statutes.

LE

In respect of the CAA? Getting qualified people in place is the biggest issue.

When routine bites hard, And ambitions are low, And resentment rides high, But emotions won't grow...By voting on this post with a SABC I confirm that I am a more than a bit stupid and an all round loser.

LE

Yes, several states. It has obviously escaped your feeble mind that I keep saying that EASA has 30+ members when there are only 28 in the EU. The non EU members in EASA have to accept the ECJ this was explained some 500 pages and 10,00 messages ago and multiple times since. None of the other EASA members what to change that and in any case if there were a change it would not be London. At least 27 of the 30 odd members would veto that.

NON EU members of EASA have to accept the ECJ. They do as do the majority of the UK citizens.

EASA has Bilateral agreements with many other states. Not a problem.

That is what this whole discussion has been about. The other state has to have an Civil Air Regulator that conforms to the the International Aviation requirements. No problem.

It will take the UK CAA a MINIMUM of 5 years with a LOT ov very expensive investment to get to the level required International law. There has been no move to do this so far and the absolute minimum it could theoretically be done is by April 2023 though in reality it will be closer to 2028. Inthe time between levin the the ECJ and therefore EASA until some time between 2023-8 there would be no civil flights in the UK

During the time the US FAA has said to will sort pout the servicing of it's aircraft by effectivly taking over licensing of the UK Aerospace industry that services it's civil aircraft. So we come out of the EU (where we have a major say) and get told what to do by the USA whilst the UK airlines stop operating inthe UK

‘Men sail a boundless and bottomless sea. There is neither harbour for shelter nor floor for anchorage, neither starting-place nor appointed destination. The enterprise is to keep afloat on an even keel.’ - Michael Oakeshott

LE

It's TMPM, who used the ECJ as a convenient excuse for her failures as Home Secretary. They're still the ebil empire in her mind.

When routine bites hard, And ambitions are low, And resentment rides high, But emotions won't grow...By voting on this post with a SABC I confirm that I am a more than a bit stupid and an all round loser.

Correct There years of inaction have already passed. Nothing bene done. So there are still 5 years of work to do. However the 5 years was predicated on a best case scenario. Since them many of the requirements for the best case are not going to happen so the re-assesment is 8-10 years.

LE

Not unless they have an alternative to our loot. Coming the c*nt to try and apply pressure has consequences when dealing with a democracy . All the cards are not with mr Barnier despite what the fervent remainers would wish.

LE

Correct There years of inaction have already passed. Nothing bene done. So there are still 5 years of work to do. However the 5 years was predicated on a best case scenario. Since them many of the requirements for the best case are not going to happen so the re-assesment is 8-10 years.

When routine bites hard, And ambitions are low, And resentment rides high, But emotions won't grow...By voting on this post with a SABC I confirm that I am a more than a bit stupid and an all round loser.